The Pennsylvania State University The Graduate School College of the Liberal Arts A LITTLE GOES A LONG WAY: ANGER EXPRESSION DURING TECHNOLOGY-MEDIATED PERFORMANCE FEEDBACK A Thesis in Psychology by Sarah E. Teague © 2011 Sarah E. Teague Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science August 2011 The thesis of Sarah E. Teague was reviewed and approved* by the following: Alicia G. Grandey Associate Professor of Psychology Thesis Adviser Sam T. Hunter Assistant Professor of Psychology Karen Gasper Associate Professor of Psychology Melvin M. Mark Head of the Department of Psychology *Signatures are on file in the Graduate School ii ABSTRACT Emotions have been found to convey information that helps individuals make sense of and manipulate their environment. One example that is relevant to the workplace can be seen in feedback interventions. According to the social functional perspective, emotions expressed by the feedback provider are likely to add to a recipient’s understanding of the feedback message. The Emotions as Social Information (EASI) model is consistent with this perspective and states that expressed emotions influence observer behavior through two pathways: performance inferences and affective reactions (e.g. liking of the feedback provider). Recent work with the EASI model suggests that angry feedback can have beneficial effects on performance, and the current study expands these findings by investigating whether technology-mediated communication influences how recipients respond to angry feedback. Drawing on media richness theory, I proposed that angry feedback would be perceived as more intense in richer media and that this would have an indirect effect on individuals’ behavior on subsequent task performance through effect of the two EASI pathways. Participants were assigned to one of three computer—mediated angry feedback conditions (i.e., video, audio, text) in response to a divergent thinking task, then were asked to complete a variation of the same task. Media richness in technology-mediated communication modalities was found to act as a catalyst, where richer media increased the perceived intensity of expressed emotions. In general, these differences in perceived intensity of groups manifested in differences across groups for the EASI mechanisms, in that participants in the richer media conditions reported lower performance inferences and less liking of the feedback provider, as well as greater felt anger and anxiety. However, analyses for the indirect effect of intensity of anger on subsequent performance through the EASI pathways were largely unsupportive. Trending results suggest that liking has a non-linear (inverted-U) effect on originality, such that participants who reported moderate levels of liking generated more original responses to the task. Follow-up exploratory analyses were conducted in an attempt to clarify the findings. Results for these analyses, as well as implications for theory and research are discussed. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Tables ...................................................................................................................................v List of Figures ................................................................................................................................ vi Acknowledgements ....................................................................................................................... vii Introduction ......................................................................................................................................1 Literature Review .............................................................................................................................3 Feedback ......................................................................................................................................3 Emotions as Information ..............................................................................................................6 Communication Modality ..........................................................................................................11 Current Study .............................................................................................................................15 Method ...........................................................................................................................................22 Participants and Procedure .........................................................................................................23 Stimulus Development ...............................................................................................................26 Measures ....................................................................................................................................27 Analysis......................................................................................................................................31 Results ............................................................................................................................................34 Manipulation Check ...................................................................................................................34 Hypothesis Testing .....................................................................................................................36 Exploratory Mechanisms ...........................................................................................................42 Discussion ......................................................................................................................................44 Anger Intensity and EASI Mechanisms ....................................................................................44 Mediated Model .........................................................................................................................45 Implications ...............................................................................................................................46 Limitations .................................................................................................................................48 Future Directions .......................................................................................................................48 Conclusion .................................................................................................................................51 References ......................................................................................................................................61 Appendix A: Stimulus Script .........................................................................................................71 Appendix B: Survey 1 ....................................................................................................................72 Appendix C: Feedback Provider Bio .............................................................................................73 Appendix D: Task Instructions ......................................................................................................75 Appendix E: Survey 2 ....................................................................................................................77 Appendix F: Survey 3 ....................................................................................................................79 iv LIST OF TABLES 1. Descriptive Statistics and Correlations Between Variables ......................................................52 2. Results from Analyses of Variance (ANOVAs) – Mechanisms and Manipulation Checks .....53 3. Results from Analyses of Variance (ANOVAs) – Performance Outcomes and Controls ........54 4. Summary of Multiple Regression Analysis for Time 2 Originality (EASI Mechanisms) .........55 5. Summary of Regression Analysis for Time 2 Originality (Liking Only) ..................................56 6. Summary of Regression Analysis for Time 2 Originality (Epistemic Motivation X Condition Interaction) .....................................................................................................................................57 7. Summary of Regression Analysis for Time 2 Flexibility (Felt Anger Only – cF2F vs. Text) ..58 v LIST OF FIGURES 1. Original EASI Model and Current Study Model .......................................................................59 2. Difference Score Comparisons for Performance Outcomes by Condition ................................60 vi ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to acknowledge Dr. Alicia Grandey, my thesis advisor, for her indispensible guidance and support throughout the duration of this project. Additionally, I would like to recognize the thoughtful suggestions and consideration provided by Dr. Sam Hunter and Dr. Karen Gasper. To all of my committee members, thank you so much for your unceasing flexibility and willingness to help. I would also like to thank several groups of individuals who helped during various stages of the project. First, thank you to Jeff Lovelace for being the subject of the stimulus materials. Second, thank you to Alissa Parr and Sari Maneotis for their helpful suggestions on the proposal documents, study protocol, and defense documents. Third, thank you to the three undergraduate research assistants – Kelsey, Alisha, and Maxine – who coded the creativity data. I would also like to thank my family members – Dad, Mom, Lewis,